ugly unamericans

I’m pretty sure that my lawn man, Miguel, is a legal immigrant. I’ve never checked papers on him but he tells me that he makes regular trips to and from Mexico. As far as I know, that does not involve a covert middle of the night swim.

On the other hand, I’m not so sure about Miguel’s hired hands. The faces change periodically and when I speak English to them, they usually smile politely and nod toward Miguel who speaks reasonably functional English. I’m guessing that the papers are not necessarily in order on these people and I’m very glad it is not my job to verify that.

I’m not so glad that it soon will be.

In the world as it is about to be, if you do not make it your business to check papers, you will be in jeopardy of becoming an involuntary guest of the federal penal system. I don’t know how risk averse you are, but these new laws will probably have me doing my own lawn again for the first time in many years: the old reliable neighborhood teenager just isn’t available anymore.

I know this from experience. Last fall some teenagers came to my door looking for some leaf clean-up work. I thought it would be good to support the industry of American youth even if it was at Miguel’s expense, so I agreed. They started on the job and since I had to leave, I paid them before they had finished and paid more than they asked for in their inexperienced low job bid. When I returned, the job was about half done and I never saw the budding entrepreneurs again.

Miguel handled the rest of the job.

Immigrants have been handling the jobs that second and third generation Americans would not throughout our history. One of the amazingly stupid things is to consider that we had to have a whole civil war over the forced labor of Africans in the cotton and tobacco fields when “free” labor was readily available were we not too stupid to pursue it. Even before slavery ended, Chinese immigrants were famously tending to the construction of railroads and other laborious jobs on the Western frontier. Irish and German coal miners too are a part of our fabric of unconscious social memories.

I say unconscious because individuals fully aware of the centrality of immigration to the success of our nation would not exhibit the mass stupidity that is rampant. You have seen them on the news too. I heard a seventy year-old lady on the radio who pulled no punches. “I hate illegal immigrants”, she said with a vicious edge. Increasingly they have the sensibility to include “illegal” in front of the word immigrant lest their bigotry show too clearly.

This misdirected anger is very odd because unless you are one hundred percent indigenous American, you too are an immigrant of sorts. It is rather trite to say that immigrants built this country, but as is necessarily the case, trite things became so because of their truth.

We love to think of our modern selves as more enlightened than the bad old days, but illegal immigration is the source of the worst de facto racial exploitation since the Emancipation Proclamation. What makes it so bad isn’t the actual condition of the illegal aliens. There is little doubt that the immigrants of the late 19th and early 20th Century were materially far worse off than the Hispanic immigrants of today. What is so horrible is the intentional complicity of our government in creating a black market in Hispanic labor to bolster our economic health.

Intentional may seem a strong accusation, but the facts compel that conclusion. The notion that we can not effectively control our borders is simply absurd. Examples are easy to come by, but surely none is more relevant than that of the state of security in the post-occupation Iraqi oil fields. And the Soviet Union was famously able to effectively seal borders long before the advent of modern electronic hardware.

To think our present situation to be involuntary is delusional.

Perhaps it is just voluntary ignorance. The facts are there in plain sight such as when it seems just yesterday we had multiple mini-scandals of would-be federal Cabinet appointees that knowingly employed illegals for domestic services. The rich and powerful are clearly benefiting from the existence of the black market in a very personal and direct way. It is no great leap to realize that these same people understand the value of illegal immigrant labor to their key campaign contributors in business.

Nothing new here: just follow the money.

I’d also urge you to follow your instincts in evaluating the moral depravity of people who have for decades turned a blind eye to illegal immigration only to turn around and suggest that illegal immigrants be demonized as felons for nothing more than a political side-show. The very people who have profited most from the presence of illegal aliens are using them a second time for crass political advantage.

Much has been said about the fact that these people are here illegally and have it coming. I simply can not stomach that simple minded rationalization of fundamentally bigoted attitudes. I would ask you to put yourself in the shoes of a Mexican laborer with a family to feed and support. For decades, Estados Unidos has ineffectively guarded its borders and unaggressively pursued illegal residents who want nothing more than to earn some money to send home.

The only thing missing is a formal invitation.

The real question is how do we fairly and compassionately fix a broken system? The answer is certainly not to round up the illegals and deport them for their felonious ways.

The honest and effective solution is to allow an appropriate level of legal immigration from Latin America, but increasing these levels is untenable until we stanch the flow (and exploitation) of undocumented people. The avarice of our ruling class is further exhibited by the undeniable double standard that exists between expanding the H1B visa program for skilled workers while creating an underclass willing to do the dirty work. Instead of asking the world to send us their huddled masses, we invite those having the key skills powerful corporations are seeking and those who are willing to sneak in illegally and work for substandard wages.

This all gives a whole new dimension to Ugly Americans.

I hate to make the economic argument when the moral one is so strong, but perhaps Ugly Americans might respond to such an appeal: sadly, it is the only one that works for many. So I ask, have you given any thought to who is going to be paying the taxes for your Social Security and Medicare support in a few decades? Declining birth rates among European descent Americans tell you that it won’t be our own kids. Have you given any thought to where the labor will come from to continue to grow the American Economic machine? Rising productivity will only take us so far.

Like every important issue of our time, factual analysis and deductive reasoning seldom visit the hyper-politicized forums of inquiry. Time after time we allow political agendas to pervert our national discourse. A return to genuine skeptical inquiry is no more likely on this critical matter than any other.

It is doubly sad that this is so on something so fundamentally American and formerly at the forefront of our social consciousness.

I know I’m going to sound racist here, but I’m saying it anyway. I was just at the Health Department earlier, getting a birth certificate copy. What I noticed was lots of Spanish speaking immigrants, and Jesus, did they all have tons of kids. One family had one older women, a daughter who looked about 20, an 9 kids. 9 kids! And of course, each of the other hispanic families had a bunch of crying kids too. Too many. I mean, I know we like to say birth control is against God, yada, yada, yada, but we never expected anyone to actually listen to us. And then I started to understand what the Professor is talking about. Funny enough, I was also watching some program last night with video from a bus that went off some 40 ft drop into a river bed. There were rescue crews, bodies in the water, etc. It was something in South America. It just looked like loads of people everywhere, overcrowded. The chaos from the driving was obvious. I thought to myself, “this only happens in Latin America, not in the USA,” and then realized again what the Professor is talking about.The fear is that what is there will be here soon enough. It’s a bit racist (or is it?), but we can be honest here.

“Common/Pretty,We won’t go there…. :-)”-that was a nice early morning laugh… the sense of humor around here is pretty good… Prof, I think you might be the only conservative who can make jokes… and good ones at that… if they find out they’ll kick you out of the club… ;o)-They don’t have Rednecks in Boston, but they have some kind of equivalent…they used to do a skit about it on Saturday Night Live.

Common/Pretty,We won’t go there…. 🙂“<>I just don’t view the vast majority of the folks who came here to work as <>criminals<>.<>”1. Neither do I.2. I only view people as criminals who meet < HREF="http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/criminal" REL="nofollow">this<> definition.3. Speaking of definitions. To immigrate means <>to enter and usually become established; especially : to come into a country of which one is not a native for permanent residence.<>It appears that someone who comes here purely for the “work”, and then only to send it’s fruit back home, is not seeking to “become established” and therefore does not meet the definition of being an <>immigrant<>. An “immigrant” would not tend to taint his or her chances of “establishing” themselves by committing intentional or careless errors like breaking immigration laws. These work-seeking, self-serving, portion that choose to break immigration law 1) are, by definition breaking the law (see qualifier where I said “break immigration law” :-), and 2) not acting in a rational way by tainting their Chances of citizenship by becoming a law breaker. People who ARE immigrating wouldn’t do this and people who ARE NOT immigrating, but just here for the dollars, don’t care about legality, tracking, documenting, etc.All of that logic is predicated on not providing incentive to break laws like our current Coyote-in-Chief. Amnesty encourages immigration law-breaking. I absolutely do not want people who are not breaking the law to go back home if home is another country. I absolutely want non-Americans who willfully break the laws, say immigration law, to adios!“<>but I don’t buy your blanket assignment of this same action and mindset to the immigrant masses.<>”I didn’t say all immigrants are of that mindset. I did say that folks who choose to willfully break some laws, say immigration laws, then <>tend<> to ignore other compliance related laws like having a license, proof of insurance, etc., etc. In their low income, low profile, low cost lifestyle (criminals, not immigrants) it would make no sense to keep up compliance related laws that have a very significant cost, like auto insurance.As a side note, with the theft of identities that occur for monetary reasons of charging stuff to other people and ruining someone’s credit rating, is it equally malicious for a immigration law breaking, work seeking individual to participate in the forgery of identification (social security card, license, green card, etc.) and damaging of an individual’s credit rating and tax status? I have seen some of my clients have tax issues because somebody already filed a tax return involving their social security or some such shenanigans. Their cost in time, paying me, lost refunds, IRS hassel were real. Though the illegal may not have known the victim or intended any specific damage to occur, only to “borrow” the social security number to appear legit, that is tantamount to firing a gun into a crowd and saying that you specifically did not intend harm to those persons actually hit by the bullets. The victims are not amused or impressed with such excuses.“<>All I know is I reject your lumping these folks as equal to burglars.<>”Stealing is not defined by how bad we need or want what we steal. There are many things we can steal, i.e. the taking of what does not rightfully belong to us. It can be goods, services, or rights. The right to work here, visit here, or become a citizen here is reserved for people who meet those qualifications enumerated in the law, whatever they may be. Somebody illegally snatching those things up for themselves, including entry into this country, cannot escape the definition or burglar, or thief, or trespasser. It is not evil me, but the laws and words themselves that compel us to call these acts what they are. Doth thou shoot the messenger? “<>…the GOP idea of sending all {illegal immigrants and their families} back to Mexico is Un-American.<>”If I am caught sneaking into Germany in the dead of night, knowingly breaking German border laws, for my personal financial gain, would it be Un-German for them to escort me and my family to the nearest ride leaving for America?“<>Any immigrant that makes it to US soil should receive immediately amnesty… i.e. they should always be held harmless.<>”That negates everything you just said about “<>We have the right and obligation …to define our border policy and enforce it accordingly.<>” If they get amnesty immediately regardless of how badly they break our border policy, then we have no policy and the inmates are running the asylum.Prof. Ricardo

Here is from the rednecks at < HREF="http://news.bostonherald.com/immigration/view.bg?articleid=140728" REL="nofollow">Bostonherald.com<>:“Local police are nabbing growing numbers of illegal immigrants for unlicensed driving because porous state laws allow them to register business and personal vehicles without first getting driver’s licenses, a Herald review found. “Police chiefs in several communities said the legal loophole, which grants special vehicle registration numbers to people without licenses, leads to risky conditions on the roadways as more and more illegal immigrants seek to drive without training or authority. “ “It’s lawlessness,” Malden police Chief Kenneth Coye said. “There is no regard for standards . . . and I think there is a sense among a lot of people that it’s no big thing.” ” ……

Prof/Ugly,Just kidding… you ain’t ugly. 🙂<>Currently we just take them back to the starting line. Can you imagine if a thief broke into a store and justice system stopped them, said don’t do that, and their punishment was to be restored to a position just outside of the place they burglarized.<>You make some very good points about “why we should control our border”… but then I don’t think anyone here has ever said we shouldn’t do that. Where you lose me however is continuing to view this as a “immigrant criminal problem” rather than primarily a US government failure to enforce it’s borders. I just don’t view the vast majority of the folks who came here to work as <>criminals<>. I view the guy that hit your friend and drove off as a criminal… but I don’t buy your blanket assignment of this same action and mindset to the immigrant masses. I do not buy the fact they come with a “law breaking trait” either… although I’m sure education levels and their experiences in Mexico regarding the rule of law must shape them to some degree. All of our kids living in our greed-fostered culture also has an influence on our kids/citizens. Maybe our traits are greedier and better law followers, and their traits are more humility, less greed, but “sneaky”. All I know is I reject your lumping these folks as equal to burglars. I think Tony said it right many posts ago… the law treats those two as unequal. I think the GOP idea of sending all {illegal immigrants and their families} back to Mexico is Un-American. It’s our fault the borders aren’t controlled… I hold the immigrant looking for a job harmless. We are the one’s with the power here… the immigrants are the helpless poor {huddled masses}. Your black and white reading of the law has almost zero impact on me in this particular debate. It would be foolish to say that means “I have no respect for the law”. This is the way I look at it. We have the right and obligation {the one’s in power with the wealth and the better economy} to define our border policy and enforce it accordingly. Any immigrant that makes it to US soil should receive immediately amnesty… i.e. they should always be held harmless. If one <>would<> say “any father would act that way for their family” then one <>must not<> treat that individual as a criminal. We need a liberal border policy, but we need to know about every single immigrant that is here… and we need to be able to track them. We certainly need to track them on the highway. You won’t like this one, but I actually imagine many immigrants that drive illegally, and on occasion flee an accident… aren’t automatically evil. I can imagine a dad here illegally, needing that US job, needing a car to get there… and facing family devestation if they are caught in a fender bender. Once again…. a little collectivism (even with non-citizens) makes more sense. If they are driving… even if not a citizen… they have to be known and have to be covered by insurance. Giving a poor very little options… and then jumping on them as common criminals because they had the audacity to “try and survive and feed their family”… or even worse… “wanting what those self-righteous Americans have”… is shallow.1) Conrol the border2) Let {lots} of immigrants in3) Know every single one of them and be able to track them4) include them and their family in the baseline common good, and eliminate the underground society5) Encourage them to speak English for THEIR good… but be a good host and have the rednecks learn some Spanish.Yoshi… “rednecks” was for you. 🙂

“Currently, other than a slight inconvenience, there is not incentive not to break the law.”I think I agree there. If the only consequence is to drop them off at the border for them to try the next day, it isn’t much of a consequence. Like I said though, what can you actually do other than throw the book at them? Lock them up? For how long and at what cost? Maybe we could control the borders with real effectiveness. Then have a relatively easy line to go through to get in with a temporary work permit, with an “application fee” roughly equivalent to what a coyote costs. And the revenue from that could pay for the cost of securing the border. For the record, I DO see the problem of having a bunch of undocumented people here. Makes it pretty hard to track them in case of a crime. Your description of drug traffiking reckless drivers sounds more like most teenagers I know, but I suppose at least they have an identity here and generally will be held accountable if they get into trouble, unlike an illegal.

Yoshi,It sounds like you want there to be consequences (“throw them in jail, or do whatever”), but that we need to make them legit.The problem is whatever our limit for certain countries citizens to come in, if that limit is exceeded, are there measures available to prevent, or capture and prevent future breeches by these excess. Currently we just take them back to the starting line. Can you imagine if a thief broke into a store and justice system stopped them, said don’t do that, and their punishment was to be restored to a position just outside of the place they burglarized. Currently, other than a slight inconvenience, there is not incentive not to break the law. Merely streamlining the red tape process is not the problem. They are wanting to avoid being “regulated”, keeping “tabs on them,” and desire to fly “under the radar.” That is how they can sucessfully compete at such low wages. There gasoline cost just as much as yours. How do they compete?They have lower costs. 1) multiple families share a residence, 2)multiple persons share a vehicle, 3) free or low cost medical care, & 4) no insurance, specifically, no auto insurance. Yoshi, you may be a tad young and carefree, but the other gents here know the cost of health, home, auto, liability, life, and whatever else insurance you can imagine. When I think about the money I shell out monthly for insuance after tax, and what I could do with that: save for retirement, kids college & weddings, decent car, etc. So illegals are already breaking the law, why waste money being responsible and obeying other laws.A case in point. Just met with my men’s group this morning. One fella, a sales rep was in west Texas on the way to the airport in a rental car (A Lexus G35!) to return home. He got rear-ended and noticed the other car jumping the median and fleeing the scene. With the memory and anger of his wife twice being rear-ended in her minivan, the first by a hit-and-fun, the second by uninsured Hispanics, he chased them in the rental G35….for 5 minutes until he could record the license plate. I had to ask: “What race were they?” He said they looked like they were Hispanic. Why does that matter? It just fits the scenario I have laid out for you. They get here illegally, so its no great step to do other things illegally like drive w/o license or insurance, or sell drugs, or whatever.And as a digression, you’ve been to 26 other countries. How do they drive in other countries? In Germany they have very strict lane discipline. Slower traffic keep right or die. In England and others most folks stay in the lanes well and obey the laws. In others, people drive as if there were no markings on the pavement and no common understanding of how to get down the road. A lot of illegals bring with them their lack of respect for laws and lane discipline, from whatever country they are from. When you are trusting your wife and two babies in car seats in a minivan to the same roads that contain a deteriorating level of driver respect, training and professionalism, your position of youthful male immortality will give way to family provider and protector, and you’ll buy your petite wife an Excursion to cart your wee babes to the respective locations. All cultures have their redeeming values, but traffic safety does not need an infusion of diversity, IMHO.Prof. Ricardo

I understand these concerns. I wouldn’t want any of those things to happen to anyone. It’s nothing anyone should have to put up with. Those are good stories, and it’s ridiculous anyone had to deal with all that. But isn’t that the purpose behind regulating them? Getting them papers, etc? Making them legit so that we can keep tabs on them, sue them, throw them in jail, or do whatever, seems like the idea. Keeping them illegal and under the radar just invites trouble like you are talking about.There is no other alternative other than being really militant, kicking people out aggresively… really throw the book at them.

“<>All that being said, I don’t think it’s going to be noticeable to everyday folks like me and you if more Mexicans are allegedly here. It’s just not something I think will affect my life in any measurable way.<>”For those who have eyes to see. There are none so blind as those who won’t see, because then reality and truth are superfluous.I just read the other day in a news article about a gentlemen in some eastern state, can’t remember which, got in an accident with an illegal. Of course the illegal didn’t have any insurance. Upon hearing that an illegal was involved in the accident the police said they were too busy to respond and did not give a ticket to the illegal, didn’t confiscate the vehicle. The did nothing. The American dude’s insurance wouldn’t pay for it since he had full coverage except for uninsured motorist. The illegal walked Scott free. No deportation, no ticket, no restitution, no nothing. You and I never had it so good. But wait, the story continues. The next week the police stop the American victim because his parking light was busted from the accident. They issued him a ticket. He explained what happened and they said tough. The wreck was not his fault, but he gets a ticket, has to pay for the repair out of pocket, and has the knowledge that we are showing compassion to illegals.My dad (81) was backing out of a parking place, an illegal was speeding through the parking lot and they hit. The illegal felt it was my dad’s fault, but did not pursue it because they had multiple infractions themselves – no insurance, illegal, maybe forged license, etc.If you are looking for evidence, its all over the internet. Try http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/A < HREF="http://www.odmp.org/officer.php?oid=396" REL="nofollow">good friend<> of mine was killed by a drunk in 1992 . An intoxicated immigrant that I suspect was illegal. Maybe because of my friend’s death I have been hypersensitive to news reports and others telling me of uninsured illegals driving here like they were driving in their countries, ie no respect for lanes, laws, inebriated, etc. For years we watched his young widow and her three daughters at our church deal with their pain.I understand your wanting to show compassion on the less fortunate. I believe that could better be accomplished elevating their country vastly rather than mixing third world behaviors and methods with our country and calling the “happy median” some form of success. Out country does not have to deteriorate for other countries citizens to improve. But unchecked illegal immigration has already been detrimental to our country on multiple levels. And some have hit home a little harder than others.Prof. Ricardo

I don’t really care who comes here, whether from Korea or the Congo or from Argentina. I do think it should be orderly, and they should be documented, and should pay into the tax system like everyone else. If people sneak in, we should penalize them somehow or another. At the same time, we have to be realistic. We don’t want a DMZ area along the Mexican border. All that being said, I don’t think it’s going to be noticeable to everyday folks like me and you if more Mexicans are allegedly here. It’s just not something I think will affect my life in any measurable way.The assumption seems to be that more citizens are more burdens. Isn’t that the opposite of what the pro-lifers constantly tell us. The E.U. is a bigger market than the USA, wouldn’t having more Mexicans give us a bigger market? It just seems like this is a good thing. I don’t know. I think you just have this idea that we are going broke educating all these kids, and giving medical care to all their babies. And maybe you are right, but I just don’t see it (yet).So we have more pollution from their cars? We’ll, if they drove in Mexico, they’d probably do more damage than they would here. As for Africa, again, if we would stop protecting our markets from their goods, they’d be able to stay right where they are.

Is global warming a problem?And the US of A is a big contributor?You want to lessen our contribution to pollution?Would importing 20 million people of lower economic spectrum folk (those that probably drive older, less efficient vehicles, etc.) increase or decrease USA greenhouse gases? Increase or decrease USA petroleum usage? Increase or decrease USA pollution? Increase or decrease USA reliance of foreign oil?And you thought I wasn’t an environmentalist.With regard to your Africa ONE program, how about an open border with Africa?Let’s see, we’ll bring ship loads of them in over the next decade, say 20 million or so. They don’t have to be documented because red tape is so difficult. Any communicable diseases brought in and not caught by traditional immigration regulation are no biggie since it apparently is no problem for county & municipal hospitals to take up the slack. We can educate their children and we can keep them in a pseudo-legal shadow society where they can do those jobs that “we just won’t do”, earning wages that are less than American’s are willing to work for, meanwhile retaining citizenship to their homeland, thus if they vote, voting for what benefits their African motherland and not America. And we get cheap crap and the thrill of stroking our heart strings. Ahhh! The politics of guilt and pity – how sweet it is.Prof. Ricardo

Don’t worry Prof. We’ll all go to sleep tonight, tomorrow night, and one night a year from now, and even ten years from now, and we’ll all wake up and things will pretty much, more or less be the same, regardless of how many Mexicans show up. We’ll still be eating at Outback Steakhouse. Or put another way, as my redneck uncle always said to me(refering to the luxury of the air conditioner and criticizing my lack of work ethic), there will still be “cold air blowing on your ass.”

Vicente Fox is brilliant. Destroy the economy and out-source your unemployed to a neighboring country, where his people get, not just employment, but free education for their children and free medical care. And he did it by sneaking up on us, convincing us that its for our benefit, it’s the compassionate thing to do for the perpetrator, and that we can by no means expect our needs to be satisfied by any other. The equivalent of having a rapist sneak up on us, convincing us that its for our benefit, it’s the compassionate thing to do for the perpetrator, and that we can by no means expect our needs to be satisfied by any other. Enjoy your evening America. But don’t expect flowers and an evening on the town. The bill is on you this time.Prof. Ricardo

Common Good,“<>Prof… are you the butt-ugly American Tony was talking about? You will only beautify when you quit being a wealth horder apologist. 🙂<>”I’m still trying to figure out why you want an America that either lives paycheck-to-paycheck (<>It’s the more than you can spend in a lifetime wealth…<>) or would want to amass funds purely to donate to the government.I noticed you didn’t address approximately 100% of my questions. Too busy watching the Beav on TV no doubt.——————“<>And yes… the common good ilk see the disparity… it’s a very dangerous wealth gap growing in the US like a cancer.<>”Dangerous in what way and to whom? How have your three friends/acquaintances wealth been a danger to you or anyone else? Why or why not? Please show causal forces at work. And how can importing 20 million impoverished people lessen that disparity?And I’ll add: Or is importing 20 million impoverished people for their benefit a greater good than eliminating that boogie man “disparity?”Prof. Ricardo

Prof,<>Back then we had Leave it to Beaver, today we have Sex in the City.<>See… you proved my point. We had Beaver-themed TV back then, and we do today.Prof… are you the butt-ugly American Tony was talking about? You will only beautify when you quit being a wealth horder apologist. 🙂

“<>You have it wrong. It’s the more than you can spend in a lifetime wealth AT THE SAME TIME IN THE SAME SOCIETY with poverty.<>”Let me get this straight. I can only make what I can spend before I die? I assume in C.G.’s world all Last Will & Testaments say “….and I leave everything I didn’t spend to Uncle Sam.” How philanthropic you are. To hell with the kids and wife. Give it to the beacon of fairness and efficiency that is run by the 50.1% that you fawn over so much.“<>And yes… the common good ilk see the disparity… it’s a very dangerous wealth gap growing in the US like a cancer.<>”Dangerous in what way and to whom? How have your three friends/acquaintances wealth been a danger to you or anyone else? Why or why not? Please show causal forces at work. And how can importing 20 million impoverished people lessen that disparity?“Since those who won didn’t necessarily deserve to win, it is up to government to redistribute the wealth so that everyone ends up with the same.”“<>We are demanding equal health care and education of kids… rather than class sensitive education and health care.<>”How about equal clothing, transportation, and housing? Those are important too. I’ve never invested in $150 Nike’s, but I could get used to it given enough time. 🙂“<>It’s up to the citizens to look after the least among us, and constantly provide for that individual based meritocracy… you know, promote general welfare and insure tranquility.<>”An Example: So a man and a woman have nothing to their names but a ‘74 P/U w/o A/C, a ‘77 Vega that works on its own schedule, a $250/mo. apartment, and early American garage sale furnishings. They barely make minimum wage. Is it their own responsibility to improve their lot? The private sectors? Or Governments responsibility?<>Really? Let’s see… now we have Sopranos and Bill Mahre on TV, and back then we had Indian masacres and slavery.<>Back then we had Leave it to Beaver, today we have Sex in the City. And your point?<>Today we have bare breasts at Superbowl halftimes, back then we had child labor.<> Don’t knock child labor till you’ve tried it. I can’t remember the last time I’ve mowed my lawn.<>Today we have presidents lying a nation into war… back then… oops, you’ve got me there.<>Again we have that creative definition of lying. I would have thought you would have picked one of President Bush’s more glaring failures….say, his immigration policy . 🙂Prof. Ricardo

Prof,I bet you like to be tied up. 🙂“The wisdom of those of Common Good’s ilk is to destroy the wealthy to eliminate the disparity rather than having the poor earn more. All they see is disparity.”I just answered this elsewhere. You have it wrong. It’s the <>more than you can spend in a lifetime wealth<> <>AT THE SAME TIME IN THE SAME SOCIETY<> <>with poverty<>. It’s always a nice try with the reverse class discrimination… roll it up in a big ball of ENVY and rich hating. The motive is measuring a society by how the poorest in it are doing. The analogy with the wealthy is like the old line “why do you rob banks… because that is where the money is”. And yes… the common good ilk see the disparity… it’s a very dangerous wealth gap growing in the US like a cancer. Why the puritan types support that remains a mystery to me.” They see life as a lottery. Some people win through chance and most don’t.”I personally know three friends/aquaitances that are now members of Southern Hills Country Club… all three in different industries. One took a product line and it’s customers from his employer and made millions. Another was mentored by his employer until he took the mentor’s customers for himself. Another had good fortune drilling oil wells, but didn’t hit the Southern Hills brigade until hoodwinking a utility company on actual value. Please save me the speech on how well $ map to “deserved” in our brand of capitalism. “Since those who won didn’t necessarily deserve to win, it is up to government to redistribute the wealth so that everyone ends up with the same.”Not the same. We aren’t asking for everyone to tee off at Southern Hills. We are demanding equal health care and education of kids… rather than class sensitive education and health care. We are demanding individual based meritocracy rather than family advantage meritocracy passed down from generation to generation. Sure sounds American to me… at least the Ben Franklin American.“Since those who won didn’t necessarily deserve to win, it is up to government to redistribute the wealth so that everyone ends up with the same.”It’s up to the citizens to look after the least among us, and constantly provide for that individual based meritocracy… you know, promote general welfare and insure tranquility. Private sector gets the first shot. Upon it’s failure, the citizens have the right to cede these rights via our representative government.<>The depths of depravity that are common place on TV today vs a decade or three ago are striking.<>Really? Let’s see… now we have Sopranos and Bill Mahre on TV, and back then we had Indian masacres and slavery.Today we have bare breasts at Superbowl halftimes, back then we had child labor.Today we have constant obscenity in the movies, back then we had seperate facilities for blacks and whites. Today we have presidents lying a nation into war… back then… oops, you’ve got me there.

“<>I think you need more fiber in your diet.<>”Reminds me of Saturday Night Live in its infancy.“Oh give me fiber,Bulk and roughage.Fiber ‘cause I want to feel light.Fiber, in the morning….”Yoshi,“<>I always heard you are either super rich or super poor, which to me sounds like capitalism.<>”The disparity issue is a socialist strawman. All of the figures I have seen have always shown the least disparity in “capitalist” countries. The poor of Mexico are seeking the wealth equivalent of our poor to middle class. Obviously our poor are much wealthier than immigrants level of poverty.The wisdom of those of Common Good’s ilk is to destroy the wealthy to eliminate the disparity rather than having the poor earn more. All they see is disparity. They see life as a lottery. Some people win through chance and most don’t. Since those who won didn’t necessarily deserve to win, it is up to government to <>redistribute<> the wealth so that everyone ends up with the same.Socialism like this involves some people deciding what is best for the common man. And what level of wealth do you think the “deciders” are? Yep, wealthy, but not of their own doing. Socialist countries have the greatest disparity of wealth. I can back this up, but its got to mean something to you before I invest the time.Those who champion the free enterprise system are not worried about disparity. The wealth of others is not injurious to us. We are only concerned with improving our own lot and having the freedom to do so. It is when government destroys the rewards of hard work and gives a disincentive to work that you create nations like Mexico where the common man is poor and is fleeing his poverty.Let me interject here that there is also a moral component that many people do not recognize. The moral corruption of Mexico, where the police are on the take as much as bureaucrats, would not look or function any better overlaid on a capitalist system. Our country founded with a mixture of Christian ethics and liberty have made us the most prosperous country I know of. But countries are not static over time. We have quickly thrown off that Christian underpinning and the results are showing. More and more politicians are caught in corruption in our country every day. A recent Readers Digest had an article about how common cheating has become in high schools and colleges. The depths of depravity that are common place on TV today vs a decade or three ago are striking. We are on a fast decline and we can only ride the wave of our forefathers wisdom and decency so long. And boatloads of current day “historians” have tried to reveal how corrupt our forefathers were to minimize the current moral disparity between us and them.But the Common way of looking at ethics today (pun intended) is that it is “<>some kind of Rules Zealotry mantra<>” that requires bran muffins. They don’t mind using ethics to attack their opponents, but do not subscribe to them as rules to live by.Prof. Ricardo

I’m not an expert on Mexico, but I’m not so sure it is a “socialist experiment.” I’ll have to check. I always heard you are either super rich or super poor, which to me sounds like capitalism. I knew a guy who started his own business there, he was about 25 years old. He started a limo company in Mexico City, and then sold it. Did really well.I also have an uncle that has a security systems company there (as well as on the border area).I was in Monterrey in February, and it looks like any American city. They even have Applebees and Hooters (for the record, I’ve never stepped on foot in any Hooters anywhere). I think there is more to economic growth than simply the variable “socialist” governments. Maybe they are just overpopulated and to emigrate to USA hits the pressure valve (or however that expression goes).I agree with you though that unless they are paying into the tax system, they should’t receive the benefits. So give them amnesty and send them the EZ-40 form come tax time. Won’t that work?

Prof,I think you need more fiber in your diet. You have become so full of fecal matter, your mind can no longer be trusted. You keep going off in some kind of Rules Zealotry mantra endless loops. Take two dumps and get back to us. When you come back, you will be able to see that Juan didn’t really steal much of the American dream by dodging rattlesnakes at night to pick tomatoes in California.

< HREF="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/05/21/MNGFQIVNAF1.DTL" REL="nofollow">San Francisco Chronicle, May 21, 2006<>Washington — The current migration of Mexicans and Central Americans to the United States is one of the largest diasporas in modern history, experts say. Roughly 10 percent of Mexico’s population of about 107 million is now living in the United States, estimates show. About 15 percent of Mexico’s labor force is working in the United States. One in every 7 Mexican workers migrates to the United States…. ————————————-Sooooo……The US of A needs to let in how many?Does this mean we not only employ but educate 10-15% of Mexico’s population?Does this mean we provide healthcare for 10-15% of Mexico’s population?I’m for ending ALL agricultural subsidies whether they affect Mexico or not. Sending Vicente Fox a bill for ONLY the education and healthcare portion of caring for his citizens is more than fair. Direct payments are welcome, but if the FOX refuses, how about a tariff to cover the bill?Better yet, how about they abandon their corrupt socialist experiment and make Mexico a place that attracts its own people and is so prosperous and favorable to commerce that people start immigrating to Mexico? No need to slap me, I’m awake. But I can dream can’t I?Prof. Ricardo

Get this. I once went to Istanbul, Turkey with some classmates (we were studying abroad and got a cheap deal). At customs/ immigration, I noticed there were several lines. A few lines were charging 30 dollar “entry fees.” Other lines weren’t, for some reason (I guess disorganization). Some of my classmates got suckered. Once I realized what was happening, guess which line I went to? Arbitrary fines and rules, probably made up on the spot. Is not paying that about not having respect, or about not letting yourself be pushed around by government officials? I wish I could buy into that racket. They must make a fortune off naive “law-abiders.”

I don’t think it’s about being too lazy to enforce the law. It’s about being realistic and practical. It’s like prohibition. It cost us more than it benefited us, so we scrapped it. I’m sure there were a bunch of ladies sitting around whining about how all those bootleggers were gettting away, but as I said earlier, maybe some people should get their own lives and stop worrying over other people.No one cared about this stuff 2 years ago really. It’s just been put in the media recently, triggered off by this Minutemen stuff. Before that, no one cared. No one cared. Am I really to believe this is something you’ve been losing sleep at night over? If this is about them sucking healthcare resources dry, maybe we should save our tax money by stopping subsidies we give our farmers too, which would keep more Mexicans employed picking crops in their own country, instead of ours. Like I read, for every ton of corn subsidized, two Mexicans lose work. And guess where they go next? As for having been an illegal immigrant myself, like I said, that country made a fortune off me, and I didn’t feel like sitting in a beaucratic office for ten years just so that they could “stamp” me. I’m an American, a postmodern hybrid-version of those Southern rednecks I always talk about. I don’t do offices or arbitrary laws(made up to keep civil servants working) or bureaucracy well. I once waited though about 8 hours, the line never moved, I was told to return tomorrow, and yea right, I said forget it. I respect the law, but unlike the private sector, when there is a problem, you can’t ask to speak to the manager to get yourself treated they way you ought to be.

Yoshi: “<>So many people here are just concerned about the law-breakers, but when we propose to give them “amnesty,” and make them legit, they still aren’t satisfied.<>”I don’t understand why this is so difficult. Amnesty does not make someone legit. They still haven’t complied with the law, they only get for free what others had to work for. When your mama said clean up your room and you didn’t do it. If she cleaned it up for you, did that make you legit? It brought you into compliance but not through anything you did. I.e. you didn’t start obeying the law. We just changed the law. That’s what amnesty does. It changes the law to say: We have rules, we have laws, we have consequences to breaking laws, but don’t worry. Even though you broke the laws, are continuing to break the laws, and show no remorse for having done it, here is your reward.“<>I used to be an illegal immigrant in Eastern Europe. I never felt I was doing anything wrong.<>”That may be a part of the problem. A lack of respect for laws, a sense of entitlement. If you do not respect laws, or national boundaries, that could explain quite a bit here.“<>Anyway, I’ve yet to hear anyone opposed to the immigrants be honest about what their beef really is here.<>”Not immigrants. ILLEGAL immigrants. There is a difference. Maybe you’ve made up your mind and you’re having a hard time reconciling their “beef” with your understanding. Your amnesty doesn’t address the “law” issue. It only thumbs its nose at it. And if you don’t understand that, no wonder you don’t grasp people’s true belief and you start looking for boogie men that aren’t really there like racism. Through out this whole argument someone here is not talking about race: ME! Why? Name all 250+ countries. Every immigrant from every country needs to obey our immigration laws. Period. The ONLY reason Mexico (a country, not a skin color) gets brought into the equation is they are on our southern border, 56% of immigrants are of that nationality, and that is where the current influx is coming from. We don’t have a king. We are a nation of laws. Respect for the law is critical.On this blog I have heard people say “Bush broke the law.” Apparently that is not that serious and we should just give him amnesty. I’ve heard people say “The wealthy are treated better under the law.” Apparently that doesn’t really matter, we should just give them amnesty. Once you make obedience to the law optional, then that “anarchy” that Common is worried about becomes your problem. “100% liberty” does not equal “100% anarchy” as he wrote. 100% weak and unenforced laws = 100% anarchy.Propose law, not amnesty, but a law that is in keeping with your objectives. That makes sense. Keeping laws on the books and granting pardons (amnesty) because you’re too lazy or too cowardly (politically) to enforce them is just bad government. And we don’t need anymore bad government.Prof. Ricardo

I used to be an illegal immigrant in Eastern Europe. I never felt I was doing anything wrong. I guess I kind of felt like I could be anywhere I wanted and no one could stop me. Besides, that economy got a lot of money out of me. I guess on judgement day I’ll find out just how criminal I was though. Probably I’ll get a few centuries in purgatory for that….Isn’t this the same thing? Except I’m white, so I guess that means it’s okay. So many people here are just concerned about the law-breakers, but when we propose to give them “amnesty,” and make them legit, they still aren’t satisfied. Which leads one to wonder what this is really about…Anyway, I’ve yet to hear anyone opposed to the immigrants be honest about what their beef really is here. For all of you xenophobes, homophobes, etc, out there, ever ask yourself, “Why do I really care? Maybe I ought to get a life and leave other people alone?”

<>The Senate voted yesterday to allow illegal aliens to collect Social Security benefits based on past illegal employment — even if the job was obtained through forged or stolen documents.<> < HREF="http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060518-114132-2456r.htm" REL="nofollow">The Washington Times<>Forget the white women, hold on to your wallets. Why don’t we just have 9 passenger 2007 Suburbans idling with the AC on, a full tank of gas, waiting to take them from the border to wherever they want to go?Prof.: Illegals should be treated as if they had done something…well, uh…Illegal.Other Curm bloggers:Illegal immigrants = legal immigrants = citizens.If an immigrant breaks a law to get here, that is a badge of honor, a courageous act, and only shows their love for this country. Such devotion to family and country should be rewarded with a protected status such that, any illegal acts performed by illegal immigrants are exempt from normal reactions and should not be noticed, commented on, or in anyway treated as illegal, thus lending to the support to the equation: Illegal immigrants = legal immigrants = citizens.Let’s see. The answer to our dilemma with illegal immigration is to have a guest worker, general government pardon, non-amnesty amnesty bill.Our past 7 amnesty laws are as follows:Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA), 1986: A blanket amnesty for some 2.7 million illegal aliens 2. Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens 3. Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997: An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994 4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997: An amnesty for close to one million illegal aliens from Central America 5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998: An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti6. Late Amnesty, 2000: An amnesty for some illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens 7. LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliensThis could really catch on. We could cut down on the drug, theft, and violence problem by creating drug, theft, and violent criminal amnesty programs. We could copy the last week of the Clinton administration and do our own Pardongate. Hey Common, How about a general pardon for high income tax cheats? After all, high incomers contribute to the economy, they take jobs poor people can’t do, and the high fees (taxes) of operating a high income business nearly make it prohibitive to be legal (pay taxes).Prof. Ricardo

Hallelujah! We killed one of those evil brown people trying to take our white women! That’ll learn’em.We should just drop a nuke on all of Mexico. And put them all in camps with gas showers here in the USA. That could be the final solution. And then we can start to focus on the Vietnamese.

I heard Scott Wilder say that if a country doesn’t control movement across its borders, then it isn’t a country.Does that mean if I’m from Fort Worth and I drive into Dallas without being controlled, that Dallas is not a city.Same logic, right? Or maybe my street “isn’t a” street, because people cross it all the time without controls….

“That said, utilitarian metrics are relevant to good policy and should be considered in most policy contexts.”More and more grey appearing around those Curm edges… never thought I would see it. 🙂It’s just frickin scary how many Americans really would put these folks on trucks and buses tomorrow if it was possible… kids in tow… and just drive them across the border.btw… regarding the Brackenator laugh. What a thing of beauty. That was a pleasant addition to my Fort Worth visit. Can’t say the same thing about that frickin Studio Plus. I’m not really sure how we could explain that laugh in words… maybe a Seal having multiple orgasms in a very vocal way. 🙂

I went back to Vox Day’s editorial to cut out the part where he talks about how fast the Nazis removed the Jews, relating it to how fast we could get all the illegals out. Guess what? It’s GONE. The editors must have went back and cut it out, cause I’m SURE I saw it there… this is why I thought he might be a skinhead… btw… not fecal colored glasses…“Not only will it work, but one can easily estimate how long it would take. If it took the Germans less than four years to rid themselves of 6 million Jews….”

“we need to look at the root causes and do what we can to improve the lot of people in their home nations.”Tony, I have an international trade textbook that says for every 1 ton of corn subsidized in the USA it puts 2 Mexican workers out of work in their own country. That’s probably a loose estimate (or is it?), but imagine it’s true. We pay subsidies to big US farmers. Consequently, 2 mexicans are booted off the farm in Mexico. They head to Mexico City, probably the most overpopulated city on the planet, where jobs are hard to come by. There is little choice what to do next- they move on up north…… so that they can over-use our hospitals for free, sell the pot to sweet innocent white kids, and start communist revolutions…

Prof,You asked, “Meaning they had to choose between obeying man or God and they chose God?” Well, yes. They put feeding their family over the laws of men. Particularly laws of men that do not seem serious and which are not seriously enforced. This may shock you, but most folks break lots of laws when there is no real moral boundary and little chance of getting caught. It is easy to get twisted up over “law breakers” but who doesn’t break the speed limit from time to time.Just in case you have lost track, I’m at the head of the line when it comes to needing to end illegal immigration. In fact, I called it exploitation of the worst kind. I just will not quite go so far as to say they are definitely doing a net harm. Yes, from a micro standpoint there is often harm. Overall, my sense is that for the most part they are doing jobs that Americans will not do at any price.The first step isn’t to criminalize and deport the illegal aliens. The first step is to secure the borders. The next step is a humane plan to deal with those hear. Then it is time to look at immigration numbers and find quotas that make sense. Lastly (but probably most importantly), we need to look at the root causes and do what we can to improve the lot of people in their home nations.And no, I’m not a utilitarian kind of guy in the sense of utilitarian metrics being the sole measure of moral behavior. That said, utilitarian metrics are relevant to good policy and should be considered in most policy contexts. My point in the original post is that America as a whole is behaving in a utilitarian way on this whole topic. The illegal immigration is being allowed because it benefits those in power. In other words, I am decrying the utilitarian mode in which we are operating.

Yea, I know about liberation theology. And they were rogue Catholics.The point of that article was to bring up the “Catholic” boogeyman. But we all know that already. And that’s the irony here. Migration up north is about going where the work is to recieve a mutually agreed upon market price.It’s the old-fogey Bible-belt fire-brimstone, gold standard types that want to restrict the movement of labor and “protect” their wages. Now who’s a “communist?”

Prof,<>fecal colored glasses…<>Pawaaaaaa!!! Good one. Well, good line… I agree more with Yoshi on this blog.I’m not sure you can lump globalization in with the immigrants coming from our south… but I disagree that those getting dumped on at the lower end is the biggest consequence. The poor are always dumped on in every civilization… we are particularly clever with it (think US Conservative movement with Reagan as the poster boy). What is different now, is globalization is in the process of dumping on have’s… and you know the have’s won’t tolerate that. You are talking to a bunch of IT guys here… who are watching US company CEOs outsource IT jobs to the Indian version of Silicon valley as fast as they can. Thrifty (in Tulsa) just canned their entire 275 IT force and gave the work to EDS which has it’s Indian pipeline setup and good to go (big guys on both sides, and Thrifty CEO who made some deal on a Country Club golf course with the EDS CEO). It’s easy to dump on the poor folks… it’s a human pasttime with very little consequences. However, start following policies that significantly change the consumer demographics of have’s in our economy, and expect real blowback. Dumping on poor people has always been easy… now the dumping has moved up the food chain. It’s the kind of thing that will threaten the Prof’s lifetime ideology, because let’s be honest… you would be the first to tell us this is Capitalism at work just like it’s suppose to be. Here is the deal Prof… You (conservative theories) will fight to the death over southern immigrants, and bring up the plight of the poor legal Americans in the process. In the next breath you will say the same thing happening to the middle class IT is OK… because it is LEGAL and just how Capitalism works. I’m sorry to break it too you my friend, but your hypocrisy is showing. HURRY Prof, stop those poor Mexicans before they GRILL again.

Tony,“To me, most illegal immigrants are not criminals in the moral sense.”Meaning they had to choose between obeying man or God and they chose God?“In fact many would argue they are providing a net benefit to society.”Robinhood did as well. 🙂 (So do most dictators, but I digress…)“Whether it is a net benefit is a complex question,”Kind of like inflation. Your wages go up and prices go up. With Illegals, stuff produced by Illegals is cheaper because of their poor bargaining position. However, lower end jobs that Americans might do are discounted. An American teenager or low skilled worker might flip burgers for $6.50/hr. But if an illegal will do it for $5.50, the American is unemployed at the $6.50/hr. figure. Depending upon the weight you place on non-U.S. citizens enrichment vs U.S. citizens, honoring the law vs breaking the law, the answer varies. Much Godlessness has been done in the name of pragmatism. I hope “net benefit” is not your final arbiter. I am sure it isn’t.Four players receive a benefit for Illegals working here. 1) The Illegal himself. 2) The employer of the Illegal that either gets more work for his buck or fewer bucks for a given amount of work. 3) The government that collects tax on businesses on any area of Illegals commerce (sales tax, gas tax, real estate tax on living quarters whether owned or rented, etc.). and 4) The consumer gets cheaper stuff.Four players pay a cost in this scenario. 1) Workers displaced by Illegals and/or wages discounted for certain jobs by Illegals. 2) Taxpayers that have to pay for services to municipal hospitals, public schools, social services, and all other services that are necessary to provide for 8-20 million people, including doubling the signs, forms, and additional language expense of government conducting in two or more languages for the convenience of the Illegal. 3) Citizens because when non-citizens can intimidate through pity or power what determines citizenship and our immigration policy, then citizenship per se has been devalued greatly. 4) The law, because even though it is reasonable, when we nationally look the other way for “net benefit”, we enable a spirit of lawlessness to gather a cancerous hold on our nation. In short order, we’ll be paying off our public servants with the frequency that our southern neighbors do. I’m not looking forward to that.P.R.

Yoshi,On the implications of the communist symbology, I somewhat agree with you. I think it is definitely intended to convey a negative message about the content of the crowd.That said, there is also little doubt that Liberation Theology was a powerful movement within the Catholic priesthood in Central and South America during the 60s, 70s and 80s (with roots much earlier and adherents to this day). Granted, it can not be said to be Catholic in a sense because their many of their communist ideas where vigorously opposed by the Pope. But more recently, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have embraced some of the teachings in a carefully limited way.There is no doubt that the photo and story were crafted with specific biases and fears in mind. But to some extent those biases do have a basis in fact. The fear in my view is totally unwarranted thus the presentation comes off almost silly. Liberation Theology has pretty much run its course and the migration north has more to do with embracing capitalism than rejecting it.

Prof,As I am pretty sure you are aware, criminals normally, absent problems of proof, do not keep the profits of their criminal enterprise. Unless of course they are Congressmen or CEOs.The law has long recognized that there are crimes of moral turpitude and crimes of a more administrative nature. To me, most illegal immigrants are not criminals in the moral sense. In fact many would argue they are providing a net benefit to society. Whether it is a net benefit is a complex question, but there is little doubt that from the persepective of the immigrant the only criminal intent is the knowing violation of the immigration laws themselves.

Yoshi. What color is the sky in your world? I am so glad that when I look across a room the things I see are actually there.When you see a Southerner, a Texan, a non-urban dweller, you see a “redneck.”When you see a young man expressing himself with an unusual and short haircut, you see a “skinhead.”When you see folks that, God forbid, believe current immigration laws should be enforced, you see racists.And when you saw a picture, A PICTURE, of Jerome Corsi (I’ve never heard of him before this article) you insinuate that he is a pervert.I hadn’t planned on preaching a moral sermon today dude, but you need to start judging people on substance and not the book by the cover.Also, I hadn’t planned on being a World Net Dailey apologist. I guess you didn’t go to the first page and see that of the approx. 35 stories on page 1, 12 articles are from the Associated Press, 3 are from Reuters, 1 from the Washington Times, and several others from other media outlets. The balance were WND originals.The article I quoted mentioned the May 1 aspect being downplayed in the mainstream media. That unreported perspective needs no apology for having been covered.I noticed how you ignored vast square inches of article to concentrate on two items. The picture of the author and the paragraph that mentions Catholics.Funny how your third paragraph seeks to taint the author with no real basis. I hope that is not evidence of that Catholic belief system that you purport to represent.Speaking of Catholics. Reread the paragraph after you take off the fecal colored glasses and see what it says. Analyze:“<>The Catholic Church was clearly present in the protest crowd.<>”Obviously a largely Hispanic crowd, given known demographics, would be largely Catholic for those with a professed religion. Given religious leaders desire to support or even lead their flock, it would not be unusual for “<>WND (to) photographed a Catholic priest giving a speech on a bullhorn,…<>” However, given that men of the cloth are supposed to represent the high ideals of Christianity and the Church, it was noteworthy that the preachers were “<>surrounded by Mexican flags and F.I.S.T. red star signs.<>” Don’t you think so? Is the Catholic Church that you represent so in bed with the Communist movement that it is not noteworthy to report this? The Catholic Church that I know is not. “<>Other Catholic priests were present in the rally, one even photographed holding up a protest sign.<>” Yoshi, I would expect to see that teenager you noted above in a “Che Guevara shirt”protesting along side a communist movement, even holding up signs that represent things they don’t understand. Immaturity does that.But tell me this, Are you OK about Catholic priests, men with a high level of learning, perspective, instructed in Godly wisdom, shepherd of many souls, are you OK about them marching with communist signs, BUT YOU ARE OFFENDED at the reporting of it in the body of an article reporting on the communist involvement in the march? Me thinks the author of the article and I give far more credit to the Catholic Church than do you.Prof. Ricardo

Jerome Corsi, or whatever his name is. Prof, Prof, Prof….what is up with you? You seem pretty normal sometimes, but when you post these World Net Daily people who lose your credibility.I think it warps your perception of reality (or no wonder your sense of reality is skewed).Now, I have this theory about repressed sexuality making bitter old repressed weirdos out of people (who usually are into really bizarre kinky stuff when they are old, think Jimmy Swaggart, etc.)It’s usually these military-pentagon types, feminine priests, or Bible-belt types. They usually get into positions of power where they can ruin it for the rest of us somehow. Kind of like the picked-on kid in high school who becomes a self-righteous cop.Now take one look at Jerome Corsi. Common Good, you’ll be honest here. Take a look at this guy and tell me you’d let him baby-sit kids. C’mon now. Look at that tie. Dead giveaway. If you had a hidden camera in his house, I bet he has some sick sh*t on his hard drive.But do you know what really gave him away?Tony, get this excerpt below:“The Catholic Church was clearly present in the protest crowd. WND photographed a Catholic priest giving a speech on a bullhorn, surrounded by Mexican flags and F.I.S.T. red star signs. Other Catholic priests were present in the rally, one even photographed holding up a protest sign.”See what is implied here? I picked up on the tone right away. Brought up in the Catholic Church, this actually offends me. This is totally presented with manipulation in mind. So now its communists, AND the CATHOLICS. Must be part of the 666 plan for the Pope to take over the U.N. and rule us all with computer chips… ooooh…. I’m scared….Like I said, emotionally charged hysterical nonsense. Prof.- you are too smart for this.

Yoshi: “<>He kind of looks like a skinhead.<>“I’m sure his mother loves him just the same. As a parent you have to pick your battles. Hair grows back. I don’t always agree with Vox Day, but he challenges me a lot.

< HREF="http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/amerworkers.html" REL="nofollow">High Immigration Harms Many American Workers<> Excerpt:“Federal policies of high immigration interfere with market forces that otherwise would cause corporations and other employers to find ways to maximize American wages and working conditions while also maximizing productivity. “The result has been a decades-long wage depression in many occupations and even in some professions. “America has become less of a middle-class nation because of the quadrupling of immigration since 1965. And it has become more of a society of wide economic disparities. “Virtually all studies of this phenomenon have concluded that the greatest harm is to those American workers who already are the most vulnerable: those without high school degrees, those with lower intrinsic intelligence, those with fewer skills. <>The harm also is disproportionately felt by native-born minorities, especially Hispanics and Blacks<>, and by recent immigrants. For instance, a study by Harvard professor Dr. George J. Borjas finds that, by increasing the supply of labor, immigration between 1980 and 2000 cost native-born American men an average $1,700 in annual wages by the year 2000. However, the effects of immigration on wages were most profoundly felt by native-born black and Hispanic Americans who suffered 4.5-5% wage reductions as compared with the 3.5% wage loss felt by native-born white Americans.“For these reasons, the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, chaired by the late Barbara Jordan, concluded that present immigration numbers are a source of economic injustice in this country. The Commission recommended lowering immigration numbers significantly…”P.R.

Prof, is that “Vox Day” guy for real…He kind of looks like a skinhead, then starts telling us about how quick the Nazis got rid of the Jews….I was almost thinking the whole thing was sarcastic. I’m just going to assume it was…Hmm, interesting crowd you side with (they have a very dry sense of humor).

Tony,Does a drug dealer or other criminal get to keep income earned in the commission of a crime? A hired killer makes thousands carrying out his dirty deed. Is the money his while he “pays his debt to society” in jail? Is there a particular law or cite you can point me to? Thanks.Prof. Ricardo

Prof.,I have to admit I had to fight not to laugh at work. The Curmudgeon will vouch that my laugh can be like a commercial from the early 80’s, when I laugh, everybody listens.There is much left to do. To be honest, I would not have minded the approach the HoR took if they included a guest worker program and a way to deal with those already here.To be honest, there is no doubt that we need secure borders, but we are used to having open borders, even during times of war.We could argue fault, but we need to secure our borders, humanly find a way to treat those here, and develope a way to prevent such incursions in the future. A guest worker program would be part of a good fix in my opinion(IMHO).The intervening problem is still what do we do with 11 million un- documented people already here. They are working, buying, saving, and essentially emmigrating. As long as the guidelines are humane and legal. Heaven forbid the Bush administration do anything illegal, LAUGH. Brackenator

Brackenator,I’ve got a quote more in supporting you than me, I believe.<>The problem with a fence is that it works both ways. As it stands today, the only government agency that objects to an American leaving the country is the Internal Revenue Service, which weirdly attempts to claim income tax for up to 10 years after an American leaves the country and his citizenship behind. This is mostly because apart from the farsighted Fred Reed, few Americans now wish to leave what is still a wealthy and relatively free country. But that may not always be the case, especially given the increasing probability that the Lizard Queen will be squatting on the Cherry Blossom Throne three years from now. And a government that believes the importation of low-skill, low-income Mexicans is necessary is not one that is likely to smile benevolently upon the departure of high-skill, high-income Americans. <> < HREF="" REL="nofollow">Against a fence, by Vox Day<>Hmmmm.Prof. Ricardo

Yoshi: “<>Socialism is also wanting the govt. to protect your job from the “aliens,”…<>”Nothing could be further from the truth. Protection of private property rights is pro-liberty, anti-socialism. (Read the socialist web sites to see for yourselves their hatred of private property rights.) To be a nation governed by laws and not by man, we must define: who is married and who is not; who is an employee and who is not; and who is a citizen and who is not. By definition people who have broken the law by not meeting the qualifications for citizenship, therefore fall outside of the DEFINITION of citizenship and its benefits. Merely enforcing current law with regard to that definition and process of citizenship is not socialism.“<>…and to subsidize all your farm goods to compete with all the poor countries (which ironically is why they have to move up here to begin with since we dump our surplus agro-products on their markets and put them out of work).<>”Subsidizing any goods reeks of socialism. However, I find you analogy peculiar. We are supposed to be this great consumer nation, yet we dump our surplus agro-products on their markets. And we somehow use poor nations illegal immigrants to produce products to send back to their poor homeland. We are taxing Americans so that other countries can have affordable food that only their own laborers made here in the states. Crud! They’re even sticking it to us in the agro-business.“<>America is a “mixed economy”- a socialist state for all practical purposes. The state does A LOT for people here.<>”It is not pure socialism, but our liberties are fleeing quickly. No doubt.“<>You’d be hard pressed to find anyone here who’s not for any “socialism” whatsoever.<>”And I blame THAT on the public school system and the general level of cluelessness that exists in this country on the subject of economic and political liberties and their safeguards.“<>Everyone gets a little piece somewhere.<>”Stay on topic. 🙂P.R.

Yoshi,The fact that “for all practical purposes, (you’re) a protestor” and “not a communist” is hardly refutation that there was involvement on May 1 by organizations to use current ongoing Illegal immigrant protests for their own advantage.“<>There may be some left-wing groups from California or something which might make up about .00001% of Mexican protestors, but you can hardly claim them all commies, or socialists, or whatever….<>”Several points if I may. 1) I don’t think you actually read the article I referenced several posts back with the story and pictures of communist organizations marching in these protests. 2) In any of my posts, I do not believe I ever stated that “ALL” protestors were “communists.” 3) Even if one is clueless about who organized and set the date for a protest, nor can articulate the finer points of political philosophies like socialism & communism, I would think that this entitlement mentalitiy that is evident in a demand for dual language schools, signs, and services, free healthcare, bypassing citizenship requirements for citizenship benefits, ad nausium, would evidence to you at least a compatible political philosophy with socialism, and therefore no distancing themselves when pro-socialist/communist organizations that marched alongside them for the same workers rights, blah, blah, blah…<>“What if you are wrong?”“-What difference would it make? The word doesn’t even have any meaning anymore except to scare people that are really old.<>”The political demographics of a half million marchers or a 12-20 million illegal population demanding rights within our own border is of great importance to those of us looking down the road and not just to our hood ornament.Lets say the compassionate thing our country decides to do is grant amnesty. We now have 10-15 million new voters, predominantly in the Southwest who could radically influence voting and election results. If that voter block had a specific political philosophy, with such influence, it could well turn local and state governments towards that philosophy. The communist party has been nearly non-existent, except as an ignorable un-think tank, because the Democrat Party has so mirrored the socialist/communist agenda. The Democrats are for progressive taxation, the state educating children, the destruction of the family (redefine marriage, abortion until the umbilical cord is cut, etc.) the minimization of the influence of the church and nationalistic pride. Read the Communist Manifesto and read the Democratic platform and you will see an uncanny, and to me uncomfortable, similarity. With so many socialist leaning Democrats, entitlement minded Republicans, this additional socialist/entitlement minded recently granted amnesty population could greatly, and to our detriment, influence this country. THAT is the difference that it would make.“<>Yea, okay, you mean these immigrants are all “socialists,” not really communists. Yes, and the counter-protestors are racist klansmen. See where this generalization gets us?<>”I never said “all” or that they would define themselves as such.“<>I think they just reacting to this whole Minutemen thing…. it’s a reaction to racist sentiments, people felt threatened. I wanted to react myself when I first saw these Minutemen pop up, so it was no surprise these people decided to stand up and make themselves heard as well.<>”I concur. Why should LAW BREAKERS have to fear LAW ENFORCEMENT? I mean, to have to be accountable for their actions to persons wanting to uphold the law (minutemen) when the government has abdicated this constitutional responsibility for political reasons is the height of unfairness. Down with all laws and all enforcement! Down with governmental authority! Down with…….wait……I’m starting to sound like a communist revolutionary. Damn, its happening to me too.“<>And so when you claimed these folks marched on “International Communist Day” and featured a few select photos of some teenager wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt, it was really misleading. But who knows, maybe you really fell for it. (Unless of course you meant the whole thing in sarcasm, which I hope).<>”The best way I have found to make my point about defining my opponent of his beliefs is to use his own words. Rather than reading my sources of pro-God, pro-freedom, pro-America, let me give you something to read from the other side. When you can convince these people of what you are trying to convince me, then I’ll be closer to being persuaded.< HREF="http://www.workers.org/2006/us/may-day-0518" REL="nofollow"/>< HREF="http://answer.pephost.org/site/News2?abbr=ANS_&page=NewsArticle&id=7644" REL="nofollow">A.N.S.W.E.R.<>< HREF="http://rwor.org/a/046/may_1_editorial.html" REL="nofollow">Revolutionary Communist Party, USA<><>“An upsurge of protest among immigrants has grown over the last several months. And it is changing the political landscape in this country.”“And it was very fitting that these protests took place on May First—the revolutionary holiday of the international proletariat. Many of these demonstrations were billed as “A Day Without Immigrants…” ““On May 1, 2006—right here in the belly of the beast, it is truly exciting and significant that over a million immigrant proletarians took to the streets, in cities and towns throughout the USA<>“P.R.

Socialism is also wanting the govt. to protect your job from the “aliens,” and to subsidize all your farm goods to compete with all the poor countries (which ironically is why they have to move up here to begin with since we dump our surplus agro-products on their markets and put them out of work). America is a “mixed economy”- a socialist state for all practical purposes. The state does A LOT for people here. You’d be hard pressed to find anyone here who’s not for any “socialism” whatsoever. Everyone gets a little piece somewhere.

Yoshi: “Throwing the “communism” word around doesn’t mean anything.”“Are you talking about me or the immigration protestors?”– I guess I’m talking to both, whoever gets trigger-happy with that word.“These people aren’t communists.”“What do you mean by that?Where do you get your information?How do you know that to be true?”-Well, for all practical purposes, I’m a protestor, or I would have been if it were geographically feasible. And I’m not a communist. There may be some left-wing groups from California or something which might make up about .00001% of Mexican protestors, but you can hardly claim them all commies, or socialists, or whatever….“What if you are wrong?”-What difference would it make? The word doesn’t even have any meaning anymore except to scare people that are really old. I mean they do the menial work, the hard construction work. True, from a Depression-era definition of communist, they might fit the bill. But in 2006, the “communists” are just kids working in coffee shops that don’t want to have to hustle out there. It’s just a fashion, not an ideology. Wear the beret, you know. Yea, okay, you mean these immigrants are all “socialists,” not really communists. Yes, and the counter-protestors are racist klansmen. See where this generalization gets us? To say all those people were all socialists is giving them a lot of credit…. Most are uneducated workers, I think they just reacting to this whole Minutemen thing…. it’s a reaction to racist sentiments, people felt threatened. I wanted to react myself when I first saw these Minutemen pop up, so it was no surprise these people decided to stand up and make themselves heard as well. And now they are all “communists.” Oh, wait, they are all “socialists,” like in Denmark and Sweden…where they live better than us here? Or like in Cuba, or China, or North Korea, where it’s worse? The word “socialist,” like “liberal” or “conservative” is just a catchy word that has too broad a definition to have any real meaning. People throw that word out and some people take the bait and panic. And so when you claimed these folks marched on “International Communist Day” and featured a few select photos of some teenager wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt, it was really misleading. But who knows, maybe you really fell for it. (Unless of course you meant the whole thing in sarcasm, which I hope).

Comic relief spam for Common Good: George Bush goes to a primary school to talk to the kids to get a little PR. After his talk he offers question time. One little boy puts up his hand and George asks him his name.“Stanley,” responds the little boy.“And what is your question, Stanley?”“I have 4 questions:– First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN?– Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes? – Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?” – Fourth, why are we so worried about gay-marriage when 1/2 of all Americans don’t have health insurance?Just then, the bell rings for recess. George Bush informs the kiddies that they will continue after recess.When they resume George says, “OK, where were we? Oh, that’s right: question time. Who has a question?”Another little boy puts up his hand. George points him out and asks him his name.“Steve,” he responds.“And what is your question, Steve?”“Actually, I have 6 questions.– First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN?– Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes? – Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden? – Fourth, why are we so worried about gay marriage when 1/2 of all Americans don’t have health insurance? – Fifth, why did the recess bell go off 20 minutes early? – And sixth, what the hell happened to Stanley?”

Yoshi: “<>Throwing the “communism” word around doesn’t mean anything.<>”Are you talking about me or the immigration protestors?“<>These people aren’t communists.<>”What do you mean by that?Where do you get your information?How do you know that to be true?What if you are wrong?“<>(They do the menial work, remember?) <>”That wouldn’t be why it is known as the “worker’s” party now would it? Class struggle, proletariat vs the beougious(sp?) and all that, remember? 🙂Frankly, we often use the term <>communism<> when we are talking about <>socialism<>. All of the “communist” countries that we poo poo are really socialist countries. True ideaological communism being a “utopian end-stage of socialism in which government has vanished and we all live happily ever after under the rule “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.””Russia, Cuba, China, etc. are all socialist dictatorships because once man has power, he doesn’t want to let go.I admit I have taken the bait from the liberals and mislabeled socialism as communism. That misidentification helps preserve the better reputation that socialism has over the non-existent communist system. I’ll try to correct myself in the future, even though this had nothing to do with your point.Prof. Ricardo

“The surprising fact on the march is that about 1/3 of the people marching were citizens and documented, just that they were supporting family/friends/culture.”I noticed this myself… I actually have a friend who missed work even though his family has been here at least 2 generations, probably more. He just laughed and wanted to skip work. He didn’t even bother with any kind of march, but he liked taking the day off. He has a Che Guevara shirt too, and doesn’t even know who it is…. Che Guevara, ironically, is a pop commercial icon now.

Well, maybe they are not communista’s as much as fahionista’s. The second, third, fourth, etc generations here tend to worry more about things other kids in their peer groups tend to worry about.The surprising fact on the march is that about 1/3 of the people marching were citizens and documented, just that they were supporting family/friends/culture.We can save the culture discussion for another time.Brackenator

Throwing the “communism” word around doesn’t mean anything. These people aren’t communists. (They do the menial work, remember?) Just because some 21 year old kid like skateboards and wears a Che Guevara shirt and likes to show up at WTO protests he doesn’t understand much about doesn’t make him a “communist.”May 1, be it St. Joseph’s day or not, or Communist Day as the Professor would like to imagine, is also just merely labor day. Seems like a great day for a labor boycott. Sorry Prof, this isn’t the communist uprising they brainwashed you about in the 1950s.

Communism is in the business of stealing. “To each according to their needs” is supplied by the poor bloke that happens to have something to take. Its where you get what you don’t earn and lose what you do. Talk about disincentive to earn! No wonder it’s a failed economic theory.Prof. Ricardo

C.G. “<>Eating comes first… then soap boxes and message boards.<>”I guess “Ely Adrianna Almendariz, 20, and Henry Noel Gabrillo and Pedro Ariel Lucio, both 24″ of Arlington all had full tummies. They are held in jail since Friday for firing a .40 weapon through a bedroom window. Gotta defend yourself against those vicious sleeping toddlers. Two were in critical condition. I’m not exactly sure what they were yearning to be free of.Prof. Ricardo

C.G. “<>btw… I doubt seriously most of these guys are spending a lot of time contemplating socialism or communism. Eating comes first… then soap boxes and message boards.<>”“The “Immigrant Boycott Day” was intentionally scheduled for May 1, worldwide known as the communist and socialist “May Day” holiday celebrating the struggle of “exploited workers” internationally. This scheduling decision was downplayed by the mainstream media. Documenting how carefully the radical political left staged and managed this May 1 protest, we found clear evidence that the message of the event was intended to be a communist and socialist anti-U.S. message.” – < HREF="http://www.wnd.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50030" REL="nofollow">http://www.wnd.com<>Yes. It’s a figment of the Professor’s imagination. I tried to pull the wool over your eyes. Darn. Just too sharp for me. Oh well, its back to the deception drawing board for me.Prof. Ricardo

<>And pretty much all those earlier people who were “steeped in monarchism” were able to turn aside from their wicked ways.<>Pawaaaaaa! Game, set, match. I heard a great line on Face the Nation today. Bob Shiefer was great in his closing comments today on Face the Nation. He said he wished our national anthem was sung in 100 languages. He pointed to when some Chinese brought a minature statue of liberty to Tiananman Square, and other occations like the Berlin Wall falling where American tradition was on display. It’s flattery… not an offense to tradition. And Bob closed on this… if you stuck to 100% tradition, you wouldn’t be reading your bible unless you spoke Hebrew.

Prof,I have stated at least a couple of times how I would do it. First, you secure the borders. Then, you provide amnesty for most of those here.I don’t like the situation one bit, but it is reality. I’m just not prepared to be so harsh to people who came just looking for a better way of life. I guess I’m a tender hearted old curmudgeon.You asked, <>“I would think the accelerated assimilation of peoples steeped in socialism into our country would have a negative effect on political and economic liberty. I would also consider this undesirable. I bet you have an opinion on the matter.” <> Yeah…I have an opinion on just about everything. It is just icing on the cake that it also happens to be THE correct opinion.I think people who are “steeped in socialism” are some of the best candidates for adapting to the American way. After all, these are people that are so dissatisfied (or hungry) that they feel compelled to leave their socialist utopias for elsewhere, leaving behind family, friends and the culture of their birth.Really, it isn’t that much different from the repressed Huegenots and starving Irish before them. And from what I see in the entrepenurial realm, it looks like the Asian immigrants who have feld socialistic regimes have become so of the most productive capitalists in our country. And pretty much all those earlier people who were “steeped in monarchism” were able to turn aside from their wicked ways.

Prof,<>So how many refugees from a corrupt socialist hell-hole do you want to assimilate into our country?<>As many as it takes to put the Prof’s ideology out of business. 🙂Until then… you go boy. Teach the huddled masses to follow the rules… in 4 or 5 generations they will thank you for it. btw… I doubt seriously most of these guys are spending a lot of time contemplating socialism or communism. Eating comes first… then soap boxes and message boards.Who knew pluralism would finally be delivered in the US coupled with my favorite cuisine. More tacos and less wealth gap… andele…. andele…. andele…

Tony, Explain how you “let them in legally.” And remember, the million Illegal immigrant number is based upon those who were willing to be inconvenienced with night crossings, walking through fields, the possibility of discovery and taken back over the border. It seems to me that to “let them in legally” is suspending the law and creating amnesty. In order for them to be “legal” (AKA documented) you would need to know they came over. That would involve us telling (advertising) that “Hey. Don’t go through the desert. Come over through this normal gateway and sign these papers and you’ll be legal.” Do you think that might have an effect on the number (million) that would come over? Do you think it would increase that number or decrease it? So how many refugees from a corrupt socialist hell-hole do you want to assimilate into our country? Would you demand these new legal, documented, amnesty bearing, citizen like, potential voters trained in socialism to know or swear allegiance to our Constitution, or our country? What is the effect of assimilating peoples from around the globe who are steeped in socialism, that has ruined their own nations, and allowing them to participate in the electing of representatives to run and shape our governments? I would think the accelerated assimilation of peoples steeped in socialism into our country would have a negative effect on political and economic liberty. I would also consider this undesirable. I bet you have an opinion on the matter.Prof. Ricardo

TC,<>But the fact is, for us, those illegals have faces, children, great work ethics and humility unmatched by most arrogant Americans.<>How could we agree on something so fundamental, and yet disagree on almost everything else? Oh no… I hear the worldview thing coming again. I’m very sorry you found out Hannity and O’Reilly are both really polished pieces of exrement… but it was bound to happen sooner or later. Brack is back. Hope you are doing great. btw… sometimes we have to play the tangent game here because Tony writes about NFL jocks.

Show me and old goat and I will…Prof I am sure you are not an old goat. You wanted numbers, I got your numbers right here. They are from the Bureau of US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).Immigration………..US Year 2004 Total Worldwide…………946,142 Cap for Americas………..400,000 Total for Americas………407,471 Country of Origin Canada………………….22,437 Mexico…………………173,664 Carribbean………………81,893 Central America………….60,299 South America……………69,177 Other America………………..1Non-Imm Arrivals……..30,780,330 Country of Origin Mexico……………….4,454,061 Brazil…………………534,163 Columbia……………….394,152 Venezuela………………363,962 Top Points of Entry are Miami, FL New York, NY Los Angeles, CA Honolulu, HI Newark, NJ Estimates of Illegal Immigration…………….985,000From these numbers one could determine that they are running to/or running from something.Could it be opportunity calling?

Brackenator: “<>You may say that it is absurd, and you may have a glimmer of hope of understanding. Because “fencing” ourselves in has NEVER worked.<>”The difference between the Berlin Wall and any barriers we put in place are that we will not be “fencing” ourselves (citizens) in, and not even keeping non-citizens out, but rather keeping willful breakers of the law from stealing access to the United States, which is the prize they seek. Totally different are the Berlin Wall, Asian countries, Cuba, etc. that are trying to keep their citizens <>in<>. We are merely trying to control the flow in. Increasing the number of immigrants we will permit to match those that are already coming in in the current uncontrolled fashion is similar to firing an arrow and drawing the target around the arrow where ever it landed. Being a lover of numbers – and this is an open request to all here – rock my boat with a logical analysis at how the current immigration policy is “<>not reasonable and …seemingly punitive<>”. What number, standards, etc. would be reasonable and not punitive?A particular statistic that would touch my cold heart is the percentage of Illegals coming through tunnels, through rivers, over fences, into California, Arizona, New Mexico, & Texas that tried to do it legally, but failed. How many actually tried to do it legally vs how many heard from friends and family “If you want to get to the Gringos land, just cross the river right there”?Surely each of you has an objective standard by which our country would suffer, Illegals are not given a fair chance, etc. that you can share with this old goat.Prof. Ricardo

Prof. you are most correct, I should not have started the tangent game.I agree laws exist for a reason, but the limits that were set were not reasonable and am seemingly punitive. “Look what we have over here, you can have it if you come here, but wait, you are beyond the limit for this year, better luck next time.”I could try a distraction; “we have sooooo many jobs that we need more laborers.” That will be an eventuality because the decline of the birthrate in the US, we currently have jobs, but matching the jobless population to the jobs has been a problem.I digress. There are many Canadians who drive back and forth daily. I have a friend who lives outside Toronto but works in Buffalo, and there are thousands of Canadians like that. If we are talking about “border security” then why should we wait for the flood. Let us start a pre-emptive strike against Canadians crossing the border. Since we are guaranteed equal protection under the law, if they build one to the south, then they should build one to the north.You may say that it is absurd, and you may have a glimmer of hope of understanding. Because “fencing” ourselves in has NEVER worked.Brackenator

Brackenator said: “<>For example, our distinguished lawmakers in the House are racists. Has anyone heard of them asking for a fence to be placed between the US and Canada?<>”I suppose the lack of a constant stream of illegal Canadians flooding across this border and working for half the wages of America <>might<> have had something to do with that.“<>I am not saying that we should fling wide the borders and welcome everyone, but there has to be a way to be reasonable and compassionate.<>”If I may be so bold as to say, it is compassionate to let all understand that the laws exist for a reason and will be enforced. Whether a small child or an illegal immigrant, when the authority sets a limit, but does not monitor it or is inconsistent in its enforcement, then the wrongdoer is more likely to overstep the bounds and feel unjustly dealt with when enforcement does take place. None need fear doing right, we just have to remind them often what right is.“<>The general public seems more preoccupied venting their frustrations with illegal immigrants claiming it is a border security issue than to address real problems, like public school funding in Texas.<>”Noooooo. STOP!!!!! Don’t bring up other topics that I might want to comment on. (With fingers in ears) I’m not listening. Trollallalalalalalalalalala…….Prof. Ricardo

I do want to remind you of something that happened to my grandfather when he immigrated to this country in 1919.After WWI there were a great number of immigrants from parts of Europe that had been pretty low up to that point. My grandfather being from Sicily was greeted in parts of New York with signs that read Irish or Italian need not apply or prohibited, not welcomed…you get the drift.He eventually made his home in Boston and due to the unfriendly nature of that welcome he thought it best that his children only learned English making the full transition to the American dream. The unfortunate side effect of this decision were that his children, in particularly my mother, could no longer communicate with the family back in Italy.We have lost a great deal of the culture that our forefathers had brought with them. It is now regurgitated back on us as multi-culturalism, but that is a topic for another time.Racism and bigotry are interwoven into this nations history, and whatever the excuse, and I do mean excuse, that we purport to be the reasoning behind it does not justify it or make it right, it is still wrong. For example, our distinguished lawmakers in the House are racists. Has anyone heard of them asking for a fence to be placed between the US and Canada?We as a nations do not learn our lessons from history, another example, if we do want to deport the illegal immigrants, how to we do it? Place them in Interment camps? We’ve tried that with the Japanese during WWII and it is still an embarrassing episode in our nation’s history.I am not saying that we should fling wide the borders and welcome everyone, but there has to be a way to be reasonable and compassionate. The general public seems more preoccupied venting their frustrations with illegal immigrants claiming it is a border security issue than to address real problems, like public school funding in Texas.I think the real answer will be complicated and that neither side will be pleased with, but will be agreeable and reasonable.

TexaCon,You said, “I may need to go back and re-read a few posts to make sure you didn’t license out the curmudgeonosity to a slightly more deferential bloke.”Just so you know, he will always be Shrub to me. I have consciously decided to temper my tone at times. I still have delusions of someday getting published and I need to practice the right skills and not just what I enjoy. Not that I will ever get published. (nyone out there with contacts in the industry, I invite you to pull some strings on my behalf.)I found this comment of yours very interesting: “I hear the viciousness in some talk show hosts that otherwise, speak my language when it comes to politics and it turns me off.”Perhaps this is the first crack in your extremely hard GOP shell? Even you are starting to see the hypocritical aspect to things? Wow! I’ll take it. Be careful though because once you see some hypocrisy hanging out you might pull on the little string and find that you keep pulling and pulling and more and more keeps coming out. It is dangerous to look out above the rose colored glasses my friend.

Interesting post, Texas Conservative. Sorry about all your talk show heroes ready to send you home to Mexico. They are afaid of the Mexican boogeymen.They don’t like black quarterbacks either. In fact, didn’t Rush Limbaugh get fired b/c he said a black player wasn’t any good, but that only the media hyped him up b/c he was black? Sounds to me that the media, in the form of Rush, hyped him down b/c he was black.All this talk about “citizenship,” maybe they could just secure the borders, streamline the “legal” route, increase the number allowed in, and just give people “temporary work visas” good for 2 years or so and that are renewable under certain conditions.

<>There is that dim-witted branch of humanity that continues to assert the old platitude, “America, love it or leave it”. By that they mean, “shut up and go along with the majority”. If that is the standard, then certainly I do not make the cut.<>Yeah… I hope I never make the cut with the 51% who put Bush in office the second time. {that’s for TC}It occurs to me that addressing the growing wealth gap is the real way to gain allegance… not some forced cititation by kids in school… under god or not.

Outstanding! I mean, 15 comments down and we’re ON TOPIC! CG couldn’t wait to hunt-and-peck the word ‘religion’ but even he showed a hint of stick-to-it-iveness. All latex aside, your post was very well written. I hurt my jaw on this particle-board desk when you referred to “the President”. I may need to go back and re-read a few posts to make sure you didn’t license out the curmudgeonosity to a slightly more deferential bloke. I was struck by the struggle between my left and right brains. My favorite part of the day is lunch time because a) I get to greet all my friends in the cafeteria in Spanish and find out how their weekend <>futbol<> games went. I inquire about their families and head for the soup where my friend Jose has made yet another superb vegetable soup. I’m quite lucky. And b), I get away from users. Mostly a), though. I was a bit chagrined when the soup looked the same as it usually did on Monday, May the 1st but tasted kinda like sliding into second base. I was flummoxed and thought “where the heck is Jose?” Oh, yeah, the boycott. That got me thinking. What would we be like without people we assume to be legal immigrants. My lunch would suck. Oh, I know, a system built around laws goes a bit deeper than my veggie soup but it’s a big part of my life. The Prof, as usual, makes 100% sense and my left brain coos at his facts and figures. He’s right. You’re right Prof. I still think there has to be a better way to say “there is a contribution here and we can’t throw a blanket over this fire and expect to be the same after it’s pulled off from above us.” I just don’t know what the heck that is.My Mexican-American friends and I find ourselves in conversations and we hear each other semi-defensively describe our legal ingress into this country by our enterprising parents. There’s a separation that takes place during those conversations that says ‘we did it right and these illegals are doing it wrong.’ But the fact is, for us, those illegals have faces, children, great work ethics and humility unmatched by most arrogant Americans. None of us could say we would not do the same thing, though. Now, that doesn’t deflect from the fact that it is against the law, it’s just that the system so openly accepts it yet hypocritically rejects it when it suits the frequent voters. I hear the viciousness in some talk show hosts that otherwise, speak my language when it comes to politics and it turns me off. There is this mixing of illegal immigration and Mexican culture that leaves the latter open to ridicule and jest. I hear you on the bigotry-laced sentiments. It’s like when I was a kid and I would give the devil the finger. Sure, I meant it, but I mainly liked lifting my middle finger without the guilt.

Olan,I love TR quotes. The guy had a way with words. Much to learn there about the art of rhetoric.But, that old manifest destiny credo just doesn’t play in the world any more. If TR were alive today, I doubt seriously he would take the same position as he did then. I would ask anyone who does still cling to 19th century colonial era nationalist ideals exactly what it means to become thoroughly American.This is much more complex than meets the eye. There is that dim-witted branch of humanity that continues to assert the old platitude, “America, love it or leave it”. By that they mean, “shut up and go along with the majority”. If that is the standard, then certainly I do not make the cut.The irony in it all is that what I have always viewed the cultural beauty of America stems from the “great melting pot”. Yeah, it is unpopular to talk about it these days what with hypenated-Americans run amok and all.But the reason the ingredients melt in the pot is precisely because we did not turn the temperature up too high. Turn it up too high, and rather than melting, it boils over. Historically, we have always made a beautiful blend of the cultural influences of formerly un-hyphenate peoples.Instead, we are letting simplistic notions about patriotism cloud our reason. You can’t see this any more clearly than in the whole “you gotta learn English dammit”-movement.The only thing hispanics hurt by not learning English is themselves. They will figure this out on their own. I hear red-herring arguments all the time about needing to know English to be an informed voter.It is a red-herring because if you apply that standard to American born legal residents, you will find out that we have a functional illiteracy rate of somewhere around 50%. I can’t see a huge difference in the voting booth between someone who has to read a Spanish newspaper to get their information, and who by the way might be quite capable of good reasoning skills and someone who speaks conversational English but has the critical thinking skills of the average American (i.e. extraordinarily poor critical thinking skills).That old fashioned feel-good patriotism is extremely naive. It is time to scuttle such simple mindedness for solid intellectual appreciation of those things that truly are great about our country.Or should I say, things that were great before we lost our way in the rain of mass stupidity and moral relativism.

Prof,<>That’s not the distinctive sound of a latex glove slapping a clean wrist is it? Tony, untie me now! 🙂<>Jeeze… we are just talking about working on your perception. That said, you are an extreme case… might very well take extreme measures.Oh yeah… btw… Tony, GREAT post.

Olan,Sorry, but Teddy would find himself outdated in 2006. The fusing of nationalism and religion is endangering our way of life… it’s time for a lot less of both in the public square. Keep beating those drums and we may very well get that war the neocons wetdream over. It’s time for a lot less of “you have to be x to be an American” and a lot more of “the US isn’t the personal playground of the rich or a particular flavor of Christianity”. Choose pluralism and less greed, or get ready for the war of civilizations.<>What I recognize is that while I may not strictly approve of them in a law and order sense, they are doing what most people in the same situation would also do.<>Oh my goodness… my friend found some grey. This is a very special day… I’m very, very proud of him. 🙂 Now, tied Prof down because I’m going to dip that hardhead into a vat of grey.

Tony –T. Roosevelt had <>this<> to say about immigration nearly a hundred years ago, and what he said then applies even more so today:“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American … There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag … We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language … and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Prof,You know, you don’t have to sound apologetic and nice. I can take the heat.I really appreciate you doing such a nice job of making my argument for me.Illegal immigration distorts the labor markets. We badly need to get this mess straightened out. Big companies want cheaper labor for competitive advantage. Up until now, the power structure has obliged them to the extent that they could.Immigrants paying for social safety nets is not immoral unless you build it as a simple ponzi scheme. Granted, we are dangerously close to that if things do not change. What I am recognizing, however, is the shifting demographics of our country. If paying for my retirement were the only reason to expand immigration, yeah, that might be immoral. Fortunately, there are a lot of other good sound reasons for expanding immigration.

Prof,I totally agree with what you are saying about entry needing to be ordered. It is impossible to run a modern country without some basic controls.Again, I would suggest you examine why those easily implemented controls have never been put in place. The answer to that gets you to the insidious reality of what is really going on.See, I’m not so evil after all.

Prof,You covered a lot of ground my friend. Lets see if I can straighten some things out.As to my “mistake” of ignoring the difference between illegal immigrants and non-illegal immigrants. I have made no error at all. Your mistake is assuming that everybody is open minded and unbigoted like yourself. I guess I have run into far too many bigots in my day and this makes me cynical. But I’m pretty confident based on the number of remarks I hear that there is a lot of actual bigotry behind many of the most passionate about this matter.That certainly is not to say that just because you support the President on this, that makes you a bigot. At the same time, the President’s policy and rhetoric are deliberately designed to exploit the bigotry which in fact exists. Both of the major parties are adept at punching the buttons of the most narrow minded in our society. This administration may be the best yet.I totally agree that there is a difference between legal and illegal residents. Never said otherwise. I was writing about illegal immigrants. While I favor amnesty, I do not favor it until we secure the borders. Really, until we secure the borders all this talk is just pissing into the wind.I think you are assuming I am at some extreme on all of this just because I am forcefully opposed to the President’s position. I think allowing so much illegal immigration is idiotic…I thought that was pretty clear but I guess it was not. But that is distinct from saying that I want those here presently illegal to be summarily booted out with a felony on the blotter. What I recognize is that while I may not strictly approve of them in a law and order sense, they are doing what most people in the same situation would also do.And I have to reiterate that the people at very high levels in the country have left the borders insecure for their own financial gain. This is an important part of any moral calculus one might make on this topic.So the Curmudgeon plan looks like this:1) Make the borders reasonably secure.2) Provide amnesty to most illegals who are already here…but only after #1.3) Then make illegal residency a crime. Once you have the borders secure, I say make it a very serious crime indeed.4) Expand legal immigration to levels that probably would exceed the current level of legal and illegal immigration combined.5) Kill any form of skills test for the purposes of determining a person’s suitability for residency in any form.

With regard to redneck bowlers, there are the base carnal types in every group. I would say their rudeness had less to do with an intellectual position and more to personal pride and bigotry as they belittle their fellow man.Honestly, I don’t know how hard it is to become a citizen. Sure I’ve heard the list of requirements, but bureaucratic red tape can make the simplest task torture. However, citizenship in the best country on the planet is so valuable that I want the price tag to reflect it. If you aren’t serious about your citizenship here enough to endure, maybe you don’t deserve it.Take for instance my cousin this week. She has some health issues that have really been bugging her. When the general practitioner recommended a specialist in Dallas (maybe an hour drive for her) she huffed and said I’m not about to drive to Dallas. So what can we determine about her level of discomfort? Its enough to complain, but not enough to drive an hour. Sure closer is better, but what if that is not a choice? With my son’s multiple operations a few years ago, I thank God I only had to go to Dallas many, many times over six months. Some want it bad enough, some don’t. I contend there are both kinds coming into this country. Some are bad, some are not.And the problem is not just the difficulty of entry, but the allowable number from each country. Obviously the proximity of Mexico and its corrupt socialist utopia environment push a greater number from its country into ours than whatever limits might be set. Additionally, others from South and Central America come to us through the same porous border and they “look like each other”, therefore we lump them into our labels of Mexican, Hispanic, or Latino.Just as local governments plan zoning, taxation, traffic routing, and public works, immigration must be managed in an orderly and rational manner. We would not want millions of people coming in uncheck for disease doing to us what the white man did to the native American Indians with smallpox. We would not want to devastate Municipal and county hospitals already near bankrupt by the current influx of immigrants. Their staff, physical properties, and budget are designed around collecting taxes locally and treating the local needy. Give these local hospitals the work load of treating the next country’s needy and they will fold, not serving even those they were originally designed to. We don’t want that. We have laws to protect property valuations where no mobile homes can be built here or there, no shanties, multiple family dwellings, all that. I’m sure you would not want to see makeshift filthy squaller housing spring up in city parks and abandoned lots. A 100% open border would bring this rapidly. There has to be a limit. Otherwise you have devalued our citizenship greatly.We have a military and defense, not to protect “people” per se, but to protect “our people.” It seems selfish, but it isn’t. When I come home at night with my measily paycheck, is it so very selfish of me to take it to my house and not yours? If I use MY money on ME, is that selfish? Similarly, when I buy healthy food for my family, but the neighbors next door eat Twinkies, am I selfish for not sharing my whole wheat bread with my neighbor? Socialism and political correctness have so diseased the majority of brains that few can answer any of the questions correctly. It is not wrong to preserve self, whether an individual, a family, or a nation. To preserve this nation, WE, the citizens of this nation must decide who can and should come in, and how many. It is for our preservation.No one I know is saying “ship the immigrants back home.”No one I know is saying “all immigrants are criminals.”No one I know is saying “Let’s not look at immigration to see if it needs streamlining.”No one I know is saying “only Mexicans are Illegals.”But a lot of people are saying “Of those who do immigrate here, if you did so by breaking the law, stop it. Stop it now. And go home. Not for ever, but until you choose to obey our laws.”They are saying “ We have a border, we have a law, and we have a border patrol. Is it all that crazy to want all three to function as they were designed?”Prof. Ricardo

Olan,Nah, I did not miss the point at all. I too am a strong advocate of better border control. But it is a lot more than just hoopla…there is a substantive unfairness in all of this. I don’t have a smoke screen at all. I have no political side in all of this. I care about the unfairness to the individuals.And there is something you said that is not quite true: <>”The reality is that under the current law, being an Al Queada operative in this country illegally is a misdemeanor.” <> What you mean is that under current law, someone <>suspected<> of being an Al Queda operative and in the country illegally can only be charged with a misdemeanor. If the government can meet the standard of proof in a court of law, there are all kinds of criminal sanctions that can be brought down on terrorist conspirators.Don’t believe what the political class is telling you: they lie for a profession.

My cousin told me the other day he was at the bowling alley and there were this Indian group and this redneck group bowling in lanes next to each other. The meek Indian guys, not really knowing the customs, got harassed by the rednecks, under the pretext that the Indians bowled while the rednecks were also bowling (which I just learned you aren’t supposed to do.)Now, any fool knows what was really happening. The rednecks had a little to drink, and they wanted to intimidate those “terrorists.” Simply unsuccessful white guys intimidated that foreigners can come here, command English better than they do, become engineers for big firms, and outdo them financially in their “own coutnry.” Am I right Professor? Or am I right? Is this what was happening? Cause if I had been there they wouldn’t have said that to me. I wish I had been there actually.Are these NOT the same people who are the MAJORITY of people worried about the Mexicans?Yes, we ALL know they are. I mean, despite my little jokes, I certainly don’t seriously think you are this way, but you are the odd man out. I think for you it’s some kind of wierd loyalty thing, like when I get protective of Catholics b/c it’s part of my heritage (even though I privately admit to myself a lot of it’s weird.) If this for you is simply about someone being illegal, then all we have to do is create a way to process them in so they’ll be “legal.”

Prof.- the reason people don’t go the “legal” route is because it’s nearly impossible to do that unless you’re an Indian guy who knows all about computers. I know people who tried to come here just as tourists. It’s nearly impossible (unless you own property and a business in your home country), you have to pay huge application fees, only to be told to come back and try again next year for another non-refundable 200 dollar application fee and another rejection. Hey, if the system doesn’t work, make a new system, right? Yes, there is a legal way to get into America. Just like O.J. Simpson found a “legal” way to murder his wife. But the problem with the “legal” way, is you have to be rich to begin with, which kind of defeats the purpose of needing to migrate up north to find work (or as you would say, they come here for free medical care.)

Tony: “<>I hate to make the economic argument…. who is going to be paying the taxes for your Social Security and Medicare support in a few decades? … Have you given any thought to where the labor will come from to continue to grow the American Economic machine? Rising productivity will only take us so far.<>”Let’s have a wee little economics lesson here.Psst. There is no labor shortage.I’ve wanted a Corvette for years. Can’t afford one. Plus its not entirely practical for a family man like myself. But at $40K for the low end Vette, I just can’t swing it. Actually, the real problem is not my purchasing power, <>There is a Vette shortage!<> That’s right! If there were more cheaper Vettes I could own one. Do you see the parrallel?I can afford 2 laborers at America’s prevailing wage on my landscaping crew, but if I just had more cheaper Vettes, I mean laborers, then I could afford an additional 4 illegal Latino laborers….OR….I can afford about a dozen or so illegal Chinese….OR…about 30 illegals from Ethiopia.I could say that there is practically a shortage of everything that is too expensive <>for what I want to pay for something<>.The price of labor is the agreed upon amount by which a given supply of labor for a given demand of that labor. Loose immigration policy allows us to use someone’s disadvantaged bargaining position (law breaker) to our advantage for a greater supply so that we can have our materialism and eat it fast food too. Building our social security on the pyramid of an ever increasing “downline” of immigrants is not just shaky, but immoral. Tony, I’m not trying to be a pain. Just food for thought.Prof. Ricardo

Tony: “<>I hate illegal immigrants”, she said with a vicious edge. Increasingly they have the sensibility to include “illegal” in front of the word immigrant lest their bigotry show too clearly.This misdirected anger is very odd because unless you are one hundred percent indigenous American, you too are an immigrant of sorts. It is rather trite to say that immigrants built this country, but as is necessarily the case, trite things became so because of their truth.<>”I know that you are a smart man. You have much wisdom, that is surely obvious from your many posts. But I am surprised that you have what I perceive is the obvious mistake that is currently going around in the media, from Illegals, and from supporters of Illegals. That is the equating, on apparently the moral level, the word immigrants with illegal immigrants.Lets take your first statement above and rephrase it:<> “I hate illegal killers (that is unjustified murderers rather than self-defense and war)”, she said with a vicious edge. Increasingly they have the sensibility to include “illegal” in front of the word killers lest their bigotry show too clearly.”<><> “I hate illegal shopping (ie, shoplifting)”, she said with a vicious edge. Increasingly they have the sensibility to include “illegal” in front of the word shopping lest their bigotry show too clearly.”<>There is a difference and its OK to not appreciate law breakers.Secondly, I hope you see a distinction between a family that immigrates to America to become an American, to pursue the American dream, to swear your allegiance and your sacred honor to this country, to our Constitution, to protect and defend this country with your life and possibly the lives of your sons AND illegal individuals who sneak across the border, some very pregnant with the hopes of having the child at American’s expense, through a loophole creating a direct descendent citizen, thus obligating us to the child, to the family, sending money back home (did you catch the “HOME” word?) where their allegiance lies, sending for more to break our laws to get more money to send home, to their homeland. Every hear of dual citizenship? We don’t have it. Mexico does. So when the Illegal’s say they do want citizenship that dual citizenship taints even those who are well meaning. There is a difference between those who follow the immigration laws and those who don’t. I am sure you are not for a borderless country with no regulation what-so-ever on how many and when and for how long people come and stay here. I’m right aren’t I? Then how can you: 1) approve of the breaking of our immigration policy by those who do, or 2)equate legal immigrants with illegals or, 3)call a bigot someone who does differentiate and doesn’t approve of such law breakers, or 4) Justify the acts of the law breakers by the contributions of legal immigrants who embraced our great country?I’m willing to learn. Maybe you can reconcile for me all things not obvious.Prof. Ricardo

You’ve missed the entire point of the argument on illegal immigration: the primary issue is border control. All of the hoopla over illegal immigrants is a smoke screen and result ONLY from the proposed law to make it a felony to be an illegal alien in America.Why was that new law even proposed? The reality is that under the current law, being an Al Queada operative in this country illegally is a misdemeanor. Changing that law to make it a felony would give out law enforcement officials the tools necessary to seriously deal with terrorists in this country.But I guess the vested interests, and that includes big business as well as the screamingly racist Latino advocacy groups, don’t wish to consider the good of this country in a post 9/11 world: they only consider themselves. Pfui.The smart thing to do would be to first fix our borders, and then deal with the existing illegals in this country. Sadly, too many people have a vested interest in turmoil to make that an easily recognizable goal. But it should and probably will happen sooner or later.

“In the world as it is about to be, if you do not make it your business to check papers, you will be in jeopardy of becoming an involuntary guest of the federal penal system.”This is ridiculous, they’re just taking more and more freedom away each day.Good post Tony. Geez, you should have seen what I had to go through at customs 2 weeks ago. It’s really kind of scary how controlling these government types are. Not the America of my naive ideas, that’s for sure. Now, ironically b/c of people Prof. sides with, we’ll all have to do a bunch of paperwork just to get our yard raked. What’s next? Next we’ll have to get a $200 dollar permit to buy a Japanese TV at Best Buy.